Van Buren's term was mainly one of domestic interest, the foreign questions of most importance growing out of similar causes, the Canadian insurrection on the northern frontier and the Texan revolt on the south. The Canadian trouble was occasioned by the unwise policy of the British government in its treatment of the provinces, and it culminated, in 1837, in the seizure of Navy Island, in Niagara River, by an expedition organized on United States territory, under insurgent leaders largely aided by American sympathizers. The Canadian authorities retaliated by crossing to the American side, where they captured and destroyed a vessel, the Caroline, belonging to the insurgents. Van Buren issued a proclamation, called out the New York state militia, and took other stringent measures to prevent a violation of the neutrality laws. The rebellion was easily put down, and the Canadians reaped the benefit of it in securing from Great Britain a more liberal system of government. But Van Buren suffered much in popularity in his own State by his upright enforcement of the neutrality laws.

While the wisdom of these laws is almost universally recognized by our people, and their enactment has gained us more credit in our international relations than any other kindred act of the government, it rarely happens that the administration adds anything to its popularity by their strict and impartial enforcement, usually because of the sympathy of a large party in our country for the cause against which the laws are

enforced.

The independence of Texas had been recognized just

on the eve of Van Buren's inauguration, and one of the first questions on which he was called to pass was the proposed annexation of the new republic to the Union.

The President, foreseeing that annexation would result in a war with Mexico, declined the proposal, and thus postponed for eight years the consummation of that project. Owing to his growing anti-slavery convictions he continued, at the expense of his influence and standing in his party, a strong opponent of

annexation.

son,

The political campaign of 1840 swept out of power the party which, under the skillful leadership of Jackhad controlled the country for twelve years. President Harrison invited Mr. Clay to resume the post of secretary of state, but, with his eye on the presidency, he preferred to remain in Congress, and Daniel Webster was chosen. He was then at the height of his fame. The Dartmouth College argument and other noted cases before the Supreme Court had placed him at the head of the American bar. His orations at Plymouth and Bunker Hill, and his reply to Hayne, then fresh in the minds of the people, made him the foremost orator of his country. These and his debates in the Senate had earned for him the title of "The Great Expounder of the Constitution." Although without diplomatic experience, no man had entered the State Department with greater prestige for his work, and it is gratifying to note that his services as secretary did not diminish his reputation.

He was greatly embarrassed in his duties by the fact that he was for the time separated from his party by

the defection of Tyler, who succeeded to the presidency on the sudden death of Harrison, but he felt that the grave question he had in hand required him to continue in the direction of our foreign relations.

This question was the much debated northeastern boundary dispute, growing out of the treaty of peace of 1783. From that date it had been a fruitful source of controversy. The treaty of peace of 1814 sought to settle the matter, but the measures then devised failed. It was in 1827 referred to the arbitration of the king of the Netherlands, but his award was not accepted by either party. Meanwhile the State of Maine had been organized out of the territory of Massachusetts, and between its authorities and those of Canada there was constant turmoil and conflict. When Mr. Webster assumed office, the ill feeling growing out of the Canadian insurrection was still fresh in mind, and at the outset of the negotiations further elements of controversy were added to inflame the passions of both governments and people. It was a time of intense excitement, and it was fortunate that the negotiations on the part of the United States were in the hands of one in whose wisdom and patriotism the country reposed such confidence. The British government, equally impressed with the importance of the negotiations, sent to Washington as a special plenipotentiary, Lord Ashburton, a man of the highest character and well disposed toward the United States.

Out of their negotiations came what is known as the Webster-Ashburton treaty of 1842, which settled the northeastern boundary dispute by conceding to Canada

a strip of territory claimed by Maine and gaining a more important strip for Vermont and New York. The treaty also provided for a joint repressive action against the slave trade, and for the extradition of criminals. In the Jay treaty of 1794, provision had been made for extradition in cases of murder and forgery, but the Webster treaty enlarged the list of crimes for which extradition might be had, and it may be regarded as the first of a long series of treaties for this purpose. Webster's great success in this negotiation is indicated by the fact that notwithstanding the Senate was hostile to the President, the treaty was ratified by a three fourths vote.

While it is regarded as Webster's greatest achievement in diplomacy, and deservedly so, it is also due to President Tyler, who has received scant justice at the hands of the historians of the period, to state that much of the credit of his secretary's success belongs to his chief. No one was more free to recognize this than the secretary himself. In a letter to the President soon after the treaty was signed, he wrote: "Your steady support and confidence, your anxious and intelligent attention to what was in progress, and your exceedingly obliging and pleasant intercourse, both with the British minister and the commissioners of the States, have given every possible facility to my agency in this important transaction." 1

In England the treaty encountered more serious opposition. It was termed "Ashburton's Capitulation," and Lord Palmerston, who led the opposition, went so 1 2 Webster's Private Correspondence, 147.

far in his personal assault as to attribute Ashburton's too friendly conduct to his American wife. In this connection it is of interest to note the number of foreigners, prominent in important diplomatic affairs with the United States, who have had American wives. Without approaching any nearer to recent years than Lord Ashburton's time, we recall that Oswald, the British negotiator of the peace treaty of 1782, had acquired large interests in America by marriage. Genet, the famous minister of the French Republic in 1792–93, married a daughter of Governor Clinton of New York. Marbois, Napoleon's minister, who signed the treaty for the acquisition of Louisiana, married in the United States while chargé of the French legation. Erskine, the British minister in the trying period between 1806 and 1810, and who manifested such a friendly spirit, had an American wife. And Yrujo, the Spanish minister, who passed through strange vicissitudes extending from the administration of Washington through Jeffer son's term, was married to a daughter of Governor McKean of Pennsylvania.

The ratification of the Webster-Ashburton treaty was followed by an interesting international controversy known as "The Battle of the Maps." About the time of the pendency of the negotiations Mr. Jared Sparks, the historian, in searching in the French ar chives of Paris, found a map of America on which the boundary between the British Provinces and the United States was indicated by a red line, in a manner favorable to the British claim. He also found a letter from 1 Saunders's Palmerston, 91; Francis's Palmerston, 443.